Nileshji, basic question, apologies if this has been answered before- how do the new dates reconcile with the drying up of the Saraswati- this has been dated in the ~ 2000-1800 BC time frame and has also been referenced in the text (Balaram’s pilgrimage so as to avoid taking part in the Great WAr)
The new date (by new date, I presume you mean 5561 BCE) reconciles fine (at least does not pose any contradictions based on all the data available on Sarasvati) with drying up of Sarasvati.
I have taken the view that Sarasvati of Rigveda refers to a time that is pre-Holocene (before 9000 BCE). Satlaj had turned west (and thus stopped supply of water to Saravati) even during Ramayana time. (I will have soon my work on Ramayana timing). Yamuna also existed as separate river -flowing even into UP (south of Ayodhya) in Ramayana times. These two references provide additional corroborative support of my statement about Sarasvati of Rigveda.
There are studies which suggest that monsoon rain increased during 8000-4000 BCE timeframe (don’t quote me on this.,..I am simply recalling from memory) and that would have rejuvenated bed of Sarasvati during this time. Even in Mahabharata times (5561 BCE), Sarasvati is described as disappearing in the sand, appearing and reappearing at places and flowing underground in few other places (most of these descriptions from ‘Balarama Tirthyatra section of MBH text). And many of its places had mythologized stories associated with them, even in Mahabharata times.
Read last chapter of my book (specifically pages 206-208) for my summary and corroboration of Sarsavati for Mahabharata times (5561 BCE).